Is it wrong for believers to attempt to correct, improve, or revise earlier translations of the Bible in their language? I ask this question because some seem to assume, imply, or think that it is wrong to do so. In speaking at the recent Sword Scripture Text Conference, Norris Belcher was reported to be "pointing out the inconsistency in saying that we believe that we believe we have the inspired, preserved Word of God in our hands and then go about correcting it or improving upon it by going to the Greek." The person making this report maintained that the "purpose" of the KJV translators "was not to 'improve' or 'correct' these translations" [the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision]. The opinion that it is wrong to attempt to improve and correct earlier translations would seem to be contrary to the facts of the history of our English Bible. A study or examination of the history of the KJV would clearly reveal that the mark, aim, or purpose of the KJV translators in making another translation was to attempt to improve, correct, or make better the earlier translations. In their preface to the 1611, the KJV translators actually wrote that their mark or goal was to make the good earlier English translations "better." One definition of improve is "to make better." By attempting to make them better, the KJV translators were clearly attempting to improve and correct them. If it was actually wrong to attempt to improve and correct earlier translations, a consistent application of that argument would demand that the 1611 KJV should never have been made. It is a fact that the KJV is a revision of the pre-1611 English Bibles [Tyndale's to Bishops']. The KJV was more of a revision than it was a new translation of the preserved Scriptures in the original languages. The title page of the 1611 KJV acknowledged that the former translations were "diligently compared and revised." Perhaps the main purpose in making a revision is to attempt to make better or to improve the earlier one or ones. Making a revision usually also includes the making of corrections. The 1828 Webster's Dictionary defined revision as "the act of reviewing; review; re-examination for correction; as the revision of a book." Roget's Thesaurus listed "revision" and "correction" as synonyms. Rodale’s Synonym Finder gave “revised or new edition” as a synonym for “revision“ (p. 1036). A correct understanding of the fact that the KJV is a revision of earlier English Bibles would reveal that the purpose of the KJV translators was to attempt to "improve" or "correct" those translations. Whether they were 100% successful in their mark or goal is another question.